Read app settings

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only'. It adds context that the settings match the web app's Settings pane and that the operation is free, but it does not go beyond annotations in describing side effects or behaviors.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first states the resource and contents, the second anchors it to the web app, and the third confirms safety and cost. No filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a parameterless read-only settings tool, the description is complete enough. It enumerates the settings an agent would receive and gives the scope ('this account'), so an agent can invoke it correctly without an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are largely irrelevant. Baseline 4 applies because the description still clarifies what data the tool exposes, which is more than the empty schema does.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Read') and a specific resource ('this account's app settings'), then enumerates exactly what the settings contain: language, theme, and the competitor-watch email toggle. This clearly distinguishes it from write-oriented siblings like update_settings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: it is the read-only counterpart to the web app's Settings pane, so an agent knows when to call it for inspection. It does not explicitly name update_settings as the alternative for changes, but 'Read-only' and the enumerated settings make the usage boundary clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.